In search of the invisible dead: Exploring the deposition of human remains in Dutch Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Iron Age settlements

While European and Dutch prehistoric burial practices are often explained through the visible and prominent monuments (e.g., megaliths, barrows and urnfields), these only represent a small part of the population, around 10 to 15%. This means that it is currently unknown what happened to the majority of the population after their death. Fifty years ago, in West Frisia, disarticulated human remains were observed in house and circular ditches across ten different Bronze Age sites. This was further expanded with the observation of disarticulated human remains in three prehistoric periods: the Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Iron Age (5300–12 BC). These human remains in settlement context might give information into alternative (or less visible) and unknown burial practices in Dutch prehistory. Since their first observation, however, they have often been disregarded as ‘household waste’ or as objects that once had value but lost it, and they continue to be negatively viewed. This view has...Show moreWhile European and Dutch prehistoric burial practices are often explained through the visible and prominent monuments (e.g., megaliths, barrows and urnfields), these only represent a small part of the population, around 10 to 15%. This means that it is currently unknown what happened to the majority of the population after their death. Fifty years ago, in West Frisia, disarticulated human remains were observed in house and circular ditches across ten different Bronze Age sites. This was further expanded with the observation of disarticulated human remains in three prehistoric periods: the Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Iron Age (5300–12 BC). These human remains in settlement context might give information into alternative (or less visible) and unknown burial practices in Dutch prehistory. Since their first observation, however, they have often been disregarded as ‘household waste’ or as objects that once had value but lost it, and they continue to be negatively viewed. This view has negatively affected both archaeological excavations and how these human remains have been treated. To move away from this negative interpretation and approach these human remains neutrally, the research question asks what funerary practices are associated with disarticulated human remains in prehistoric settlements This includes sub questions about what classifies as ‘normative’ and ‘non-normative’ burials, patterns in depositional locations, the skeletal elements, and who was deposited inside the settlement, as well as what happened between death and deposition. To answer these questions, a systematic approach was taken by collecting excavation reports from the past 100 years across the Netherlands that mention both the presence of a settlement and human bones. In total, 84 settlements and 511 skeletal elements, spanning the Neolithic to the Iron Age, have been compiled into an Access dataset. The relatively even distribution of settlements across the periods makes it possible to observe changing patterns in deposition choices. When looking at the disarticulated human remains and their patterns, both in recognition of the locations that were chosen, the skeletal elements, the people who were buried, and when looking at the arguments of why these human remains are considered ‘household waste’. It becomes abundantly clear that these human remains are not household waste, or objects that had value and lost their value! Rather, they were part of a broader expression of identity through the practice of deposition in the settlement. With the evolving choice of locations related to the growing importance of land ownership, ancestry, and the household as expressions of identity. At the same time, looking at the post-mortem damages and the skeletons reveals that much happened between when someone died and when they were deposited or buried. These observations point toward fitting choices within the rites of passage, such as secondary practices like excarnation, fragmentation, and curation, indicating that individuals were not buried immediately after death. While the 511 skeletal elements might not fully explain what happened to the unknown 90%, they provide information about less visible burial practices, what occurred between death and the final step in burial rites, and suggest that disarticulated human remains in non-mortuary context, such as settlements, might have been part of the ‘formal burial program.’Show less

Leiden University Student Repository

Documents

In Collections

In search of the invisible dead: Exploring the deposition of human remains in Dutch Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Iron Age settlements